All Electronic Voting Software created by Diebold and Others Should Have Federal Certification Immediately Withdrawn Based on Forbidden, yet Newly Discovered 'Interpreted' Code!
Contact the EAC and ITA with your concerns!
By John Gideon on 12/30/2005, 8:35am PT  

Guest Blogged by John Gideon, of VotersUnite and VoteTrustUSA

VoteTrustUSA has launched a campaign; with the assistance of The BRAD BLOG and VelvetRevolution, and other state and national election integrity groups; to hold the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) accountable for ensuring that all Diebold software is re-inspected and decertified until it can be shown that all prohibited code has been removed. We also urge the EAC to initiate the re-inspection of the election software of other vendors, which may also include software that is expressly forbidden in the FEC Voting System Standards. Please go to the VoteTrustUSA action page and send an email to the EAC voicing your concern about the use of prohibited software on voting machines.

In December, The BRAD BLOG joined newspapers across the country and reported that computer experts in Florida had conclusively proven that the “electronic ballot box” in Diebold optical scan vote counting systems could undetectably alter the results of an election. Within days, California's Secretary of State reported that the use of banned software affects Diebold's touch-screen voting system as well, a fact which Diebold has acknowledged.

This breach of security exploits an inherently insecure feature of the Diebold optical scanners and touch screens known as interpreted code, which the Federal Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) of 1990 and 2002 specifically prohibit. For further details about how Diebold uses interpreted code and why it is banned from use in voting software, please click here.

Because this prohibited code exists on Diebold touchscreen machines as well as their optical scanners, the Secretary of State of California has demanded that the Diebold Touchscreen (TSX) software be re-examined by the Independent Testing Authority (ITA), who originally certified that the systems were in compliance with the 2002 Federal Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG).

How did the ITA overlook such an obvious violation of federal standards in the first place? And just as importantly, do the voting systems produced by Diebold's competitors contain similarly prohibited code?

It is time to put the EAC on notice that violations of federal standards by the ITA, which is now under their jurisdiction, will not be tolerated by voters.

Take action and send an email to each of the four EAC commissioners and to the EAC Independent Test Authority Secretariat and let them know you demand that action be taken.

National, state, and local election integrity groups can sign an Open Letter to the EAC which will be sent to them on January 3.